On The History of Bad Deals
Posted on November 21, 2006
Filed Under What's New |
The media industry is full of them as the recent Yahoo, local newspapers deal shows.
Media companies attract some of the sharpest brains in the world, the only trouble being they’re sharp on style and ego rather than intelligence and substance. One of my neighbours has her pension tied up in Time AOL shares - you might find her at car boot sales selling old copies of MAD. She’s got a few beans left to rub together but it’s really no thanks to the flawed geniuses of T/AOL. The merger lost so much value that her future changed total complexion with the speed of a Victoria Beckam dipping into the tan jar. Her deceased husband founded MAD magazine which was rolled into the TIME stable, and good old Annie was looking forward to thirty years of affluent bliss. Spare her a copper.
So to the 7 newspaper conglomerates who’ve given Yahoo their local content in exchange for a chance to sell online ads. This is reporter.net: The deal is great news for Yahoo. It gets its hands on unique content, local news. But what are the benefits for the consortium of seven newspaper chains involved in the deal? This is less clear.
He means impossible to fathom. There are few media mergers that work out. The trouble is they all make sense. When Granada and Carlton TV in the UK merged it made perfect sense Presumably that’s why half the execs left with millions in the trouser pocket. But it just hasn’t worked out. Not creatively, not in terms of decision making or audiences. But it made perfect sense. Maybe creativity is a senseless business.
Comments
Leave a Reply